- From: Koen Holtman <koen@win.tue.nl>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 15:23:44 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: jag@scndprsn.eng.sun.com (James Gosling)
- Cc: www-talk@www10.w3.org, koen@win.tue.nl (Koen Holtman)
James Gosling: >One of the most important axis for evaluation of *any* protocol is how >it scales. All of the stateful dialog proposals that I've seen on this >list score very low on this. Both my proposal and (I believe) the one by Dave Kristol intend to provide *some* minimal support for stateful dialogs as soon as possible, not to be the ultimate stateful dialog solution. > When the web gets truly large, cache hit >rates have to be *very* high. Imminent death of the net predicted. I don't know if cache hut rates will *have* to be very high, or even if they will be. I can imagine a large (but not necessarily fast) web, even without any caching. While I agree that a stateful dialog implemented with client-side Java scripts will generally consume less bandwidth, I don't think that Java browsers will be generally available, and, more importantly, generally used by more than, say, 90% of web users for some years to come. The currently discussed proposals intend to provide support for stateful dialogs as soon as possible, say within half a year. Koen.
Received on Saturday, 12 August 1995 09:24:01 UTC